5 ms·

This author has either not read or not understood the 4-Hour Work Week. At no point does the 4HWW talk about passively creating a business. What the book does

by mch82 9y ago

This author has either not read or not understood the 4-Hour Work Week. At no point does the 4HWW talk about passively creating a business. What the book does point out is that when you sell billable hours you only make money at work, while if you sell product you make money anytime someone buys your product. Making money from a product sale while asleep is referred to as “passive income”. Any app developer selling an app or web subscription is earning a passive income. The criticism also ignores the 4HWW approach, which is to talk to experts & run experiments in order to learn the best way to do things rather than flail wildly without guidance. Lastly, the criticism ignores the “Dreamlining” portion of the 4HWW where Tim explores the difference between ownership of possessions and access to experiences. While many of the methods in 4HWW are now obsolete due to changes in how SEO works and saturation in web businesses, the section on Dreamlining is still worth a read.

falcor84 9y ago
You are going against a strawman. The author only had the following to say about the book itself: >>>The book itself is not really the issue. Ferriss indeed outlines some interesting tips on managing resources to get the highest ROI on your work.
JBlue42 9y ago
While I still get random snake oil vibes from stuff Tim F. says this is a great breakdown of that first book and the essence of what one can take away from it. Create a flow of income that requires less of your time so you can do the things you want to do (even if those things take 30-40 hrs/wk).
- linkmotif 9y ago
  Yeah but that’s the snake oil. How many people are going to succeed at doing that? How many such businesses can possibly exist? You’d say I’m not creative, but I’d say I’ve seen the scope of what sells and there is little of anything you can earn passively. There’s no “set it and forget it” beyond informercials. Anyone with common sense who’s not in the business of self deluding themselves will see this. If you try playing a passive role in a business, that business will flounder and fail. If you have a successful cash flowing business, you’re a fool to be passive with it. You should be marketing it and growing it or get into some other business. The idea that entrepreneurs should seek work/life balance is some real Last Man stuff.
  - mch82 9y ago
    Do you work for a salary? If you do, the shareholders (or private owners) of the company you work for earn a passive income off of you. The point of the passive income idea is that you can earn marginally more by increasing your salary, or you can package your efforts in a product and earn exponentially more by scaling the sale of that product.
    - linkmotif 9y ago
      > Do you work for a salary? If you do, the shareholders (or private owners) of the company you work for earn a passive income off of you. This is a straw man. Yes, you can invest in something and earn dividends. But someone is very actively managing that company. If someone was managing that company for 4 hours a week, you probably wouldn't want to be an investor. The people who are earning "passive" income from such an investment aren't just paying me the salaryman, they're also paying my salaryman manager. > or you can package your efforts in a product and earn exponentially more by scaling the sale of that product. Right, but as I said in my GP, if you have a cash flowing product—which is already a huge and rare accomplishment—and you decide to spend 4 hours a week on it, you're a fool because your company is either growing or it's shrinking. So you want it to be growing.
  - JBlue42 9y ago
    Well, I don't think he ever argues for set it and forget but the actual work you put in is the "4 hrs/wk" or whatever number you want vs being tied to 40+ working for someone else. There's also the concept of 'geoarbitrage' meaning setting up a business in a good currency to be able to afford you a cheaper life elsewhere (which isn't a new idea but 'digital nomad' stuff really blew up the past few years). I think a lot of it comes down to working as little as you need to to make as much as you need to fund the lifestyle you want, especially within the concept of funding experiences vs general consumerism. At least, that's what I took away from that book. I can't really get on board with some of recent ones where he essentially compiles the transcripts from his podcasts. Sometimes he also seems too in awe of someone to question things like a real interviewer. Not to mention everyone and their pet products of the day.
dtawfik1 9y ago
Hi there. I am Daniel, the author. The post wasn't intended to be a slight at Tim Ferriss or the 4 Hour Work Week. I think Tim, is an interesting guy and he immerses himself in his craft, which underlies why he is as successful as he is. As other comments have suggested and what the post tries to make explicit is that the mindset of shortcuts and silver bullets is what is really what I found objectionable.
- mch82 9y ago
  Hi Daniel, thank you for taking the time to comment. I appreciate your view that shortcuts and silver bullets aren’t a recipe for success, and probably agree with you. However, I don’t recall anything in 4HWW promoting shortcuts or silverbullets, and I would have found your essay on craftsmanship stronger if you’d left 4HWW out of it. Edit: Also, you sparked an interesting discussion & reached the front page of HN, so that’s pretty cool!

by mch82 9y ago

falcor84 9y ago

You are going against a strawman. The author only had the following to say about the book itself: >>>The book itself is not really the issue. Ferriss indeed outlines some interesting tips on managing resources to get the highest ROI on your work.

JBlue42 9y ago

While I still get random snake oil vibes from stuff Tim F. says this is a great breakdown of that first book and the essence of what one can take away from it. Create a flow of income that requires less of your time so you can do the things you want to do (even if those things take 30-40 hrs/wk).

linkmotif 9y ago
Yeah but that’s the snake oil. How many people are going to succeed at doing that? How many such businesses can possibly exist? You’d say I’m not creative, but I’d say I’ve seen the scope of what sells and there is little of anything you can earn passively. There’s no “set it and forget it” beyond informercials. Anyone with common sense who’s not in the business of self deluding themselves will see this. If you try playing a passive role in a business, that business will flounder and fail. If you have a successful cash flowing business, you’re a fool to be passive with it. You should be marketing it and growing it or get into some other business. The idea that entrepreneurs should seek work/life balance is some real Last Man stuff.
- mch82 9y ago
  Do you work for a salary? If you do, the shareholders (or private owners) of the company you work for earn a passive income off of you. The point of the passive income idea is that you can earn marginally more by increasing your salary, or you can package your efforts in a product and earn exponentially more by scaling the sale of that product.
  - linkmotif 9y ago
    > Do you work for a salary? If you do, the shareholders (or private owners) of the company you work for earn a passive income off of you. This is a straw man. Yes, you can invest in something and earn dividends. But someone is very actively managing that company. If someone was managing that company for 4 hours a week, you probably wouldn't want to be an investor. The people who are earning "passive" income from such an investment aren't just paying me the salaryman, they're also paying my salaryman manager. > or you can package your efforts in a product and earn exponentially more by scaling the sale of that product. Right, but as I said in my GP, if you have a cash flowing product—which is already a huge and rare accomplishment—and you decide to spend 4 hours a week on it, you're a fool because your company is either growing or it's shrinking. So you want it to be growing.
- JBlue42 9y ago
  Well, I don't think he ever argues for set it and forget but the actual work you put in is the "4 hrs/wk" or whatever number you want vs being tied to 40+ working for someone else. There's also the concept of 'geoarbitrage' meaning setting up a business in a good currency to be able to afford you a cheaper life elsewhere (which isn't a new idea but 'digital nomad' stuff really blew up the past few years). I think a lot of it comes down to working as little as you need to to make as much as you need to fund the lifestyle you want, especially within the concept of funding experiences vs general consumerism. At least, that's what I took away from that book. I can't really get on board with some of recent ones where he essentially compiles the transcripts from his podcasts. Sometimes he also seems too in awe of someone to question things like a real interviewer. Not to mention everyone and their pet products of the day.

dtawfik1 9y ago

Hi there. I am Daniel, the author. The post wasn't intended to be a slight at Tim Ferriss or the 4 Hour Work Week. I think Tim, is an interesting guy and he immerses himself in his craft, which underlies why he is as successful as he is. As other comments have suggested and what the post tries to make explicit is that the mindset of shortcuts and silver bullets is what is really what I found objectionable.

mch82 9y ago
Hi Daniel, thank you for taking the time to comment. I appreciate your view that shortcuts and silver bullets aren’t a recipe for success, and probably agree with you. However, I don’t recall anything in 4HWW promoting shortcuts or silverbullets, and I would have found your essay on craftsmanship stronger if you’d left 4HWW out of it. Edit: Also, you sparked an interesting discussion & reached the front page of HN, so that’s pretty cool!